A prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing intermittent portal triad clamping versus ischemic preconditioning with continuous clamping for major liver resection

被引:182
|
作者
Petrowsky, Henrik
McCormack, Lucas
Trujillo, Martha
Selzner, Markus
Jochum, Wolfram
Clavien, Pierre-Alain
机构
[1] Univ Zurich Hosp, Dept Visceral & Transplantat Surg, Swiss HPB Ctr, CH-8091 Zurich, Switzerland
[2] Univ Zurich Hosp, Dept Pathol, Swiss HPB Ctr, CH-8091 Zurich, Switzerland
关键词
D O I
10.1097/01.sla.0000246834.07130.5d
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: To evaluate whether ischemic preconditioning (IP) with continuous clamping or intermittent clamping (IC) of the portal triad confers better protection during liver surgery. Summary Background Data: IP and IC are distinct protective approaches against ischemic injury. Since both strategies proved to be superior in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to continuous inflow occlusion alone, we designed a RCT to compare IP and IC in patients undergoing major liver resection. Methods: Noncirrhotic patients undergoing major liver resection were randomized to receive IP with inflow occlusion (n = 36) or IC (n = 37). Primary endpoints were postoperative liver injury and intraoperative blood loss. Postoperative liver injury was assessed by peak values of AST (alanine aminotransferase) and ALT (aspartate aminotransferase), as well as the area under the curve (AUC) of the postoperative transaminase course. Secondary endpoints included resection time, the need of blood transfusion, ICU, and hospital stay as well as postoperative complications and mortality. Results: Both groups were comparable regarding demographics, ASA score, type of hepatectomy, duration of inflow occlusion (range, 30-75 minutes), and resection surface. The transection-related blood loss was 146 versus 250 mL (P = 0.008), and when standardized to the resection surface 1.2 versus 1.8 mL/cm(2) (p = 0.01) for IP and IC, respectively. Although peak AST, AUC(AST), and AUC(ALT) were lower for IC, the differences did not reach statistical significance. Overall (42% vs. 38%) and major (33 vs. 27%) postoperative complications as well as median ICU (1 vs. 1 day) and hospital stay (10 vs. 11 days) were similar between both groups. Conclusions: Both IP and IC appear to be equally effective in protecting against postoperative liver injury in noncirrhotic patients undergoing major liver resection. However, IP is associated with lower blood loss and shorter transection time. Therefore, both strategies can be recommended for noncirrhotic patients undergoing liver resection.
引用
收藏
页码:921 / 930
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Ischemic preconditioning versus intermittent clamping of portal triad in liver resection: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Zhu, Ying
    Dong, Jian
    Wang, Wan-Li
    Li, Mu-Xing
    Long, Zhi-Da
    Zhen, Xing-Long
    Lv, Yi
    HEPATOLOGY RESEARCH, 2014, 44 (08) : 878 - 887
  • [2] Continuous versus intermittent portal triad clamping for liver resection -: A controlled study
    Belghiti, J
    Noun, R
    Malafosse, R
    Jagot, P
    Sauvanet, A
    Pierangeli, F
    Marty, J
    Farges, O
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 1999, 229 (03) : 369 - 375
  • [3] Effect of Remote Ischemic Preconditioning in Patients Undergoing Hepatectomy With Portal Triad Clamping: A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Liu, Xiaoqing
    Cao, Longhui
    Zhang, Tianhua
    Guo, Rongping
    Lin, Wenqian
    ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2019, 129 (06): : 1742 - 1748
  • [4] Continuous versus intermittent portal triad clamping during hepatectomy in cirrhosis.: Results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial
    Capussotti, L
    Nuzzo, G
    Polastri, R
    Giuliante, F
    Muratore, A
    Giovannini, I
    HEPATO-GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2003, 50 (52) : 1073 - 1077
  • [5] Ischemic preconditioning provides no additive clinical value in liver resection of cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients under portal triad clamping: A prospective randomized controlled trial
    Ye, Bogen
    Zhao, Hongchuan
    Hou, Hui
    Wang, Guobin
    Liu, Fubao
    Zhao, Yijun
    Zhang, Zhigong
    Xie, Kun
    Zhu, Lixin
    Geng, Xiaoping
    CLINICS AND RESEARCH IN HEPATOLOGY AND GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2014, 38 (04) : 467 - 474
  • [6] Complete versus selective portal triad clamping for minor liver resections - A prospective randomized trial
    Figueras, J
    Llado, L
    Ruiz, D
    Ramos, E
    Busquets, J
    Rafecas, A
    Torras, J
    Fabregat, J
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2005, 241 (04) : 582 - 590
  • [7] Prospective Randomized Trial of Intermittent Portal Triad Clamping vs. No Clamping in Donor Right Hepatectomy.
    Dayangac, Murat
    Taner, Burcin C.
    Balci, Deniz
    Duran, Cihan
    Akin, Baris
    Killi, Refik
    Yuzer, Yildiray
    Tokat, Yaman
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, 2010, 10 : 102 - 103
  • [8] Portal triad clamping or hepatic vascular exclusion for major liver resection - A controlled study
    Belghiti, J
    Noun, R
    Zante, E
    Ballet, T
    Sauvanet, A
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 1996, 224 (02) : 155 - 161
  • [9] Intermittent portal triad clamping in resection of liver tumors involving the hepatocaval confluence
    Yi Wang
    Han Chen
    Yan-Fu Sun
    Gong-Tian Wei
    Meng-Chao Wu From the Second Department of Hepatic Surgery
    Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Diseases International, 2002, (02) : 276 - 280
  • [10] Optimal cycle of intermittent portal triad clamping during liver resection in the murine liver
    Kang, KJ
    Jang, JH
    Lim, TJ
    Kang, Y
    Park, KK
    Lee, IS
    Clavien, PA
    LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 10 (06) : 794 - 801